On 5/15/06, Jesse McConnell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I think this is a great idea, it would be a good exercise to go through the existing ideas that are slated and clean them up in a clear well reasoned way. the limited amount in the queue at any one point in time is probably a good idea as well...force the asking of the tough questions and whatnot..
I think the stuff has to be collected and sorted to see what we have as stuff is just all over the place. I can see the issues say for "Dependencies" in JIRA but that's not related to anything in the wiki. Right now we have lots of JIRA issues for design, and documents in the wiki, and probably some stuff in APT in SVN. Right now there are a set of components in JIRA (http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MNG) and a set of categories in the wiki ( http://docs.codehaus.org/display/MAVEN/Maven+2.1+Design+Documents) and they don't mesh. I would like to sync those first and the components in JIRA, I think, should be the definitive list and we should use the components (like Dependencies) when talking about a design issue.
is that things just get kicked up on the mailing list and then disappear down on the list to atrophy. should there be an attempt to clear one or two MEPs a week? :)
Right, things on the mailing tend to peter out. The tendency should shift to trying to help resolve the issues in the queue before work begins on any new ideas. People who took the time to write up a design and put it in the queue should have a the required audience to resolve the issue. The only discussion about design that crop up on the list should be the ones in the queue, everything else gets written up and gets in line for entrance into the queue. Would be nice to have a few MEPs resolved a week but whatever it ends up being the queue becomes the only place to go in the short term. So someone who put in the effort doesn't get drown out on the mailing list. I'm going to try and align the components in JIRA with the categories in the wiki and try some ruby junk today and see what falls out. jason. jesse
On 5/15/06, Trygve Laugstøl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Jason van Zyl wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I was just looking at the wiki for the 2.1 design stuff and was > > wondering if we could use a common format for each issue? I was > > thinking that we may borrow from a Pattern Language and for each issue > > have a Context, Problem, Solution, and maybe Implementation Details. > > So for something like having selectable project builders based on version: > > Not sure if it's apropriate for us, but Python has a similar mechanism > called Python Enhancement Proposals (PEPs)[1]. They don't have the same > layout for all the requests, but they have a set of states for each > proposal. > > I think this is a process that should outlive Maven 2.1 and should cover > all parts of The Maven Project (where Maven the Tool is one sub-project). > > Just might be worth taking a look at for ideas. > > [1]: http://www.python.org/dev/peps/ > > -- > Trygve > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > -- jesse mcconnell jesseDOTmcconnellATgmailDOTcom --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
